IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/9290.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Antitrust Fines in Times of Crisis

Author

Listed:
  • Motta, Massimo
  • Fabra, Natalia

Abstract

In a model in which firms can go bankrupt because of adverse market shocks or antitrust fines, we find that even large corporate fines may not be able to induce deterrence. Managerial penalties are thus needed. If the policy may be changed according to the state of the business cycle, then the optimal outcome can always be achieved through antitrust fines that are more severe in good times and more lenient in bad times. A time-independent policy may result in either too many bankruptcies or under-deterrence as compared to the optimal policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Motta, Massimo & Fabra, Natalia, 2013. "Antitrust Fines in Times of Crisis," CEPR Discussion Papers 9290, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:9290
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cepr.org/publications/DP9290
    Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andreas Stephan, 2006. "The Bankruptcy Wildcard in Cartel Cases," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2006-05, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    2. Bryant, Peter G & Eckard, E Woodrow, Jr, 1991. "Price Fixing: The Probability of Getting Caught," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 73(3), pages 531-536, August.
    3. Emmanuel Combe & Constance Monnier & Renaud Legal, 2008. "Cartels: The Probability of Getting Caught in the European Union," Bruges European Economic Research Papers 12, European Economic Studies Department, College of Europe.
    4. Cécile Aubert, 2008. "Managerial effort incentives and market collusion," Post-Print hal-00382224, HAL.
    5. Polinsky, A. Mitchell & Shavell, Steven, 1993. "Should employees be subject to fines and imprisonment given the existence of corporate liability?," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 239-257, September.
    6. Branch, Ben, 2002. "The costs of bankruptcy: A review," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 39-57.
    7. Nuno Garoupa, 1997. "The Theory of Optimal Law Enforcement," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(3), pages 267-295, September.
    8. Unknown, 2010. "Comment on Antitrust Sanctions," CPI Journal, Competition Policy International, vol. 6.
    9. repec:bla:jecsur:v:11:y:1997:i:3:p:267-95 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Marie-Laure Allain & Marcel Boyer & Rachidi Kotchoni & Jean-Pierre Ponssard, 2011. "The Determination of Optimal Fines in Cartel Cases The Myth of Underdeterrence," Working Papers hal-00631432, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Argenton, C. & van Damme, E.E.C., 2014. "Optimal Deterrence of Illegal Behavior Under Imperfect Corporate Governance," Discussion Paper 2014-078, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    2. Angelo Castaldo & Marco Grantaliano & Nicola Faraone, 2018. "Sanzioni antitrust e vaglio giurisdizionale: uno sguardo alla tecnica di quantificazione," Public Finance Research Papers 33, Istituto di Economia e Finanza, DSGE, Sapienza University of Rome.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Katsoulacos, Yannis & Motchenkova, Evgenia & Ulph, David, 2015. "Penalizing cartels: The case for basing penalties on price overcharge," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 70-80.
    2. Harrington, Joseph E., 2014. "Penalties and the deterrence of unlawful collusion," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 33-36.
    3. Katsoulacos, Yannis & Motchenkova, Evgenia & Ulph, David, 2015. "Penalizing cartels: The case for basing penalties on price overcharge," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 70-80.
    4. Ran Jing & Jiong Gong & Fang Yi, 2020. "Antitrust Fines: Experiences from China," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 57(1), pages 167-187, August.
    5. Joseph E. Harrington, Jr. & Yanhao Wei, 2014. "What Can the Duration of Discovered Cartels Tell Us About the Duration of Cartels?," PIER Working Paper Archive 14-042, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    6. Hinloopen, Jeroen & Onderstal, Sander, 2014. "Going once, going twice, reported! Cartel activity and the effectiveness of antitrust policies in experimental auctions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 317-336.
    7. Allain, Marie-Laure & Boyer, Marcel & Kotchoni, Rachidi & Ponssard, Jean-Pierre, 2015. "Are cartel fines optimal? Theory and evidence from the European Union," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 38-47.
    8. Napel, Stefan & Welter, Dominik, 2023. "Umbrella pricing and cartel size," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    9. Christian Growitsch & Nicole Nulsch & Margarethe Rammerstorfer, 2012. "Preventing innovative cooperations: the legal exemptions unintended side effect," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 1-22, February.
    10. Kai Hüschelrath & Tobias Veith, 2014. "Cartel Detection in Procurement Markets," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 35(6), pages 404-422, September.
    11. Marcel Boyer & Rachidi Kotchoni, 2015. "How Much Do Cartel Overcharge?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 47(2), pages 119-153, September.
    12. Khemla Prishnee Armoogum & Stephen Davies & Franco Mariuzzo, 2017. "Cartel enforcement and deterrence over the life of a Competition Authority," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2017-04, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    13. Jihyun Park & Juhyun Lee & Suneung Ahn, 2018. "Bayesian Approach for Estimating the Probability of Cartel Penalization under the Leniency Program," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-15, June.
    14. Steven Shavell & A. Mitchell Polinsky, 2000. "The Economic Theory of Public Enforcement of Law," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(1), pages 45-76, March.
    15. Moritz Birgit & Becker Martin & Schmidtchen Dieter, 2018. "Measuring the Deterrent Effect of European Cartel Law Enforcement," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 18(3), pages 1-27, July.
    16. Polinsky, A. Mitchell & Shavell, Steven, 2007. "The Theory of Public Enforcement of Law," Handbook of Law and Economics, in: A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (ed.), Handbook of Law and Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 6, pages 403-454, Elsevier.
    17. Konstantinos Charistos, 2016. "Leniency programs under demand uncertainty: cartel stability and the duration of price wars," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 118(1), pages 35-46, May.
    18. Agisilaou, Panayiotis, 2012. "Keep to sustain or keep to exploit? Why firms keep hard evidence," MPRA Paper 39109, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Peter T. Dijkstra & Marco A. Haan & Lambert Schoonbeek, 2021. "Leniency Programs and the Design of Antitrust: Experimental Evidence with Free-Form Communication," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 59(1), pages 13-36, August.
    20. Laure Batz, 2020. "Financial impact of regulatory sanctions on listed companies," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 301-337, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Antitrust fines; Managing incentives; Business cycles;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K14 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Criminal Law
    • K42 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:9290. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cepr.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.